ArticlePloS one2017
Assessment of veterinary drugs in plants using pharmacokinetic approaches: The absorption, distribution and elimination of tetracycline and sulfamethoxazole in ephemeral vegetables.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modeling antimicrobial fate in the circular food system.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- Phytotoxicity Assessment ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Study of the Phytoextraction and Phytodegradation of Sulfamethoxazole and Trimethoprim from Water byInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Uptake of Pharmaceutical Pollutants and Their Metabolites from Soil Fertilized with Manure to Parsley Tissues.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Effects of tetracycline antibiotics in chicken manure on soil microbes and antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs).Environmental geochemistry and health · 2022Article
- Influence of Sulfonamide Contamination Derived from Veterinary Antibiotics on Plant Growth and Development.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study was carried out to demonstrate novel use of pharmacokinetic approaches to characterize drug behaviors/movements in the vegetables with implications to food safety. The absorption, distribution, metabolism and most importantly, the elimination of tetracycline (TC) and sulfamethoxazole (SMX) in edible plants Brassica rapa chinensis and Ipomoea aquatica grown hydroponically were demonstrated and studied using non-compartmental pharmacokinetic analysis. The results revealed drug-dependent and vegetable-dependent pharmacokinetic differences and indicated that ephemeral vegetables could have high capacity accumulating antibiotics (up to 160 μg g-1 for TC and 38 μg g-1 for SMX) within hours. TC concentration in the root (Cmax) could reach 11 times higher than that in the cultivation fluid and 3-28 times higher than the petioles/stems. Based on the volume of distribution (Vss), SMX was 3-6 times more extensively distributed than TC. Both antibiotics showed evident, albeit slow elimination phase with elimination half-lives ranging from 22 to 88 hours. For the first time drug elimination through the roots of a plant was demonstrated, and by viewing the root as a central compartment and continuous infusion without a loading dose as drug administration mode, it is possible to pharmacokinetically monitor the movement of antibiotics and their fate in the vegetables with more detailed information not previously available. Phyto-pharmacokinetic could be a new area worth developing new models for the assessment of veterinary drugs in edible plants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.